Continuing my headlong rush away from the inevitable:
Or, more accurately, where [**hic**]
/|\ 'What Pie?' /|\
YES! But not at you, Sweetheart---------
March 31, 2008
March 28, 2008
Bush’s Simplistic Visionby Dan Froomkin—The Washington Post
The new wave of violence sweeping Iraq is not just a powerful rejoinder to President Bush's insistence that the U.S. troop surge has been a success -- it's also a reminder of how the problems facing that troubled country are much more complex than he will acknowledge.
In the vision Bush puts forward, there are just two sides in Iraq: The good guys and the bad guys; our team and an enemy. . . .
That the current battle in Basra is essentially between rival Shiite militias fighting for political power doesn't alter his narrative.
[According to] Sudarsan Raghavan and Sholnn Freeman of the Washington Post "As President Bush told an Ohio audience that Iraq was returning to 'normalcy,' administration officials in Washington held meetings to assess what appeared to be a rapidly deteriorating security situation in many parts of the country."
^^^
Peter Baker writes in The Washington Post: "The images from Baghdad and Basra bristled with explosions, burning buildings, angry street protests, rocket smoke wafting from the Green Zone. The words from Dayton were 'remarkable' and 'victory' and 'rebirth.'
"'Normalcy,' President Bush said, 'is returning back to Iraq.'
"Meanwhile, Bush advisers in Washington held a series of meetings to assess what appeared to be a rapidly deteriorating situation in southern Iraq as three rival Shiite militias battled for political power.
Click here for complete text.
March 24, 2008
The Lies Conservatives Told Us
and we were stupid enough to believe:
Hale 'Bondad' Stewart wrote for the Huffington Post some months ago:
I think it's time to chime in on the debate [about Reagan's 'fiscally conservative' policies] because the underlying facts -- those pesky things -- aren't very flattering to Reagan. In fact, the facts -- again, those pesky annoying things -- indicate that Reagan was a complete and total fiscal disaster.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
So, the Conservatives accuse the Liberals of a 'tax and spend' mentality and put themselves forward as fiscally responsible.
If we look at the facts, however, they tell a shockingly different story.
and we were stupid enough to believe:
Hale 'Bondad' Stewart wrote for the Huffington Post some months ago:
I think it's time to chime in on the debate [about Reagan's 'fiscally conservative' policies] because the underlying facts -- those pesky things -- aren't very flattering to Reagan. In fact, the facts -- again, those pesky annoying things -- indicate that Reagan was a complete and total fiscal disaster.
Click here for the complete text.
xxx
So, the Conservatives accuse the Liberals of a 'tax and spend' mentality and put themselves forward as fiscally responsible.
If we look at the facts, however, they tell a shockingly different story.
March 22, 2008
Some Things Never Change.Others Just Stay The Same.
Remember the pictures of Bush playing the guitar at a birthday party while Katrina raged?
This morning I heard about what was happening while Bears Stearn was being bailed out by the Federal Reserve: Back at the White House, a press conference was going on. Our Entertainer in Chief was hamming it up for the cameras. He actually broke into a little soft-shoe.
I don't know about you, but this sort of behavior seems, to me, like that of someone for whom everything is going according to plan. . . .
Remember the pictures of Bush playing the guitar at a birthday party while Katrina raged?
This morning I heard about what was happening while Bears Stearn was being bailed out by the Federal Reserve: Back at the White House, a press conference was going on. Our Entertainer in Chief was hamming it up for the cameras. He actually broke into a little soft-shoe.
I don't know about you, but this sort of behavior seems, to me, like that of someone for whom everything is going according to plan. . . .
March 20, 2008
March 19, 2008
McCain Concludes Fact-hiding Mission to Iraq -- March 19, 2008
Mac: ‘Omission Accomplished’
Presumptive G.O.P. nominee John McCain wrapped up his fact-hiding mission to Iraq today, declaring the trip an unqualified success.
“My friends, I came to Iraq to hide the facts about the way the war is going, and in that I have succeeded,” Sen. McCain told reporters. “Omission accomplished.”
Sen. McCain praised his campaign staff for steering clear of visual evidence of recent violence in Baghdad: “Thanks to the hard work of my advance team, the surge has the appearance of working.”
The Arizona senator said that his trip to Iraq was successful in part because he was able to obscure the actual facts with new facts of his own creation.
“It’s a well known fact that Iran is training al-Qaeda,” Sen. McCain said. “And if it wasn’t a well-known fact before, it is now.”
In a speech commemorating the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, President Bush echoed Sen. McCain’s fact-hiding theme.
“As far as the war is concerned, the facts speak for themselves,” Mr. Bush said. “So I won’t mention any of them.”
Mr. Bush acknowledged that the war still presented certain challenges, but concluded on an upbeat note: “Iraq today is in better shape than Bear Stearns.”
Mac: ‘Omission Accomplished’
Presumptive G.O.P. nominee John McCain wrapped up his fact-hiding mission to Iraq today, declaring the trip an unqualified success.
“My friends, I came to Iraq to hide the facts about the way the war is going, and in that I have succeeded,” Sen. McCain told reporters. “Omission accomplished.”
Sen. McCain praised his campaign staff for steering clear of visual evidence of recent violence in Baghdad: “Thanks to the hard work of my advance team, the surge has the appearance of working.”
The Arizona senator said that his trip to Iraq was successful in part because he was able to obscure the actual facts with new facts of his own creation.
“It’s a well known fact that Iran is training al-Qaeda,” Sen. McCain said. “And if it wasn’t a well-known fact before, it is now.”
In a speech commemorating the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, President Bush echoed Sen. McCain’s fact-hiding theme.
“As far as the war is concerned, the facts speak for themselves,” Mr. Bush said. “So I won’t mention any of them.”
Mr. Bush acknowledged that the war still presented certain challenges, but concluded on an upbeat note: “Iraq today is in better shape than Bear Stearns.”
Not Sucking Up?
According to Washington Post's Dana Milbank and Lawrence Eagleburger, a former Sec'y of State and an advisor to McCain, who spoke at a meeting of Jewish leaders to reassure them, McCain won't suck up to the far-right- wingnuts.
Of the 3 issues Eagleburger mentioned -- abortion, immigration and stem-cell research, McCain is already committed to 2 of them: abortion and immigration. Eagleburger stated that McCain is in favor of 'some' stem-cell research.
Seems to me they don't have too much to worry about already. They've got him in their pocket on 2 major issues and -- and how much is 'some' research?
As to the abortion issue -- where does McCain get off having any opinion at all? How could it affect his life in the least [other than his electibility, that is. . . .]?
I noted one interesting fact: throughout the vid, Eagleburger is wringing his hands. He clearly looks uncomfortable up there decrying Limburger-and-Co -- even mildly.
[And we already know where McCain stands on another issue near and dear to the far-right's heart (such as it is) -- that of torturing people who aren't just like them.]
See here for the article and video.
According to Washington Post's Dana Milbank and Lawrence Eagleburger, a former Sec'y of State and an advisor to McCain, who spoke at a meeting of Jewish leaders to reassure them, McCain won't suck up to the far-right- wingnuts.
Of the 3 issues Eagleburger mentioned -- abortion, immigration and stem-cell research, McCain is already committed to 2 of them: abortion and immigration. Eagleburger stated that McCain is in favor of 'some' stem-cell research.
Seems to me they don't have too much to worry about already. They've got him in their pocket on 2 major issues and -- and how much is 'some' research?
As to the abortion issue -- where does McCain get off having any opinion at all? How could it affect his life in the least [other than his electibility, that is. . . .]?
I noted one interesting fact: throughout the vid, Eagleburger is wringing his hands. He clearly looks uncomfortable up there decrying Limburger-and-Co -- even mildly.
[And we already know where McCain stands on another issue near and dear to the far-right's heart (such as it is) -- that of torturing people who aren't just like them.]
See here for the article and video.
March 17, 2008
Why I'm Wimping Out
As I'm sure you've noted by now, I have become so disenchanted with things as they stand in the blogging community, I've bowed out of the fray.
Mary Ellen of the Divine Democrat is, fortunately, made of sterner stuff. Please see her blog for The State of the Progressive Party at the moment. Her post [March 15, 2008] sums up the situation quite thoroughly.
As I commented on her site: "I expect this sort of behavior from the far right wingnuts.
When the 'progressives' began indulging in it I was amazed. No more, though.
THIS is why I've started posting cat pics on my blog. . . .
If the 'progressives' don't see the writing on the wall and continue to be as vicious as they are being now, they will deserve everything they get when President McCain appoints another SCOTUS judge, Roe v Wade is overturned and torture by our gov't continues to be condoned after the election" which will be a Republican landslide.
Please note the quotes below:
"Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be a spirit of tolerance in the entire population."
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
"Nothing short of an aroused public can change things, nothing less than democracy is at stake. -- Bill Moyers
We ignore these truths at our peril.
As I'm sure you've noted by now, I have become so disenchanted with things as they stand in the blogging community, I've bowed out of the fray.
Mary Ellen of the Divine Democrat is, fortunately, made of sterner stuff. Please see her blog for The State of the Progressive Party at the moment. Her post [March 15, 2008] sums up the situation quite thoroughly.
As I commented on her site: "I expect this sort of behavior from the far right wingnuts.
When the 'progressives' began indulging in it I was amazed. No more, though.
THIS is why I've started posting cat pics on my blog. . . .
If the 'progressives' don't see the writing on the wall and continue to be as vicious as they are being now, they will deserve everything they get when President McCain appoints another SCOTUS judge, Roe v Wade is overturned and torture by our gov't continues to be condoned after the election" which will be a Republican landslide.
Please note the quotes below:
"Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be a spirit of tolerance in the entire population."
Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
"Nothing short of an aroused public can change things, nothing less than democracy is at stake. -- Bill Moyers
We ignore these truths at our peril.
March 14, 2008
March 13, 2008
March 9, 2008
March 7, 2008
The Word is 'Dissemble' , Mr. President.
"It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on the word of and the allegations by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble that means not tell the truth."
George W. Bush, on an Amnesty International's report on prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay, Washington, D.C., May 31, 2005
^^^
"[P]eople who hate America, people that had been trained . . . to not tell the truth."
Sounds like he's describing himself, here.
And, 'disassemble?'
It'd be funny if this wasn't a man who graduated from both Yale and Harvard and is, ostensibly, President of our country.
Trust G. W. not to know a synonym for 'lie.'
George W. Bush, on an Amnesty International's report on prisoner abuse at Guantanamo Bay, Washington, D.C., May 31, 2005
^^^
"[P]eople who hate America, people that had been trained . . . to not tell the truth."
Sounds like he's describing himself, here.
And, 'disassemble?'
It'd be funny if this wasn't a man who graduated from both Yale and Harvard and is, ostensibly, President of our country.
Trust G. W. not to know a synonym for 'lie.'
March 5, 2008
March 2, 2008
Words vs Behavioral Language
I keep hearing pundits, when speaking about the McCain campaign, say: "He wants to run against Clinton. She will divide the Democrats and give McCain his best chance to win."
But
I keep hearing the Republicans from George Will to Bill O'Reilly to Rush Limbaugh attack Clinton [and I count Ann Coulter's "endorsement" among the attacks] all of which suggest to me that they don't want Hillary as their opponent.
Does anyone else experience cognitive dissonance when this happens?
I keep hearing pundits, when speaking about the McCain campaign, say: "He wants to run against Clinton. She will divide the Democrats and give McCain his best chance to win."
But
I keep hearing the Republicans from George Will to Bill O'Reilly to Rush Limbaugh attack Clinton [and I count Ann Coulter's "endorsement" among the attacks] all of which suggest to me that they don't want Hillary as their opponent.
Does anyone else experience cognitive dissonance when this happens?
**giggle! snortle! chork!**
I was reading a piece in ummmmm—The Huffington Post I think it was, the other day.
In one of the comments someone who wanted people to lighten up on David Vitter said, ‘So says Jesus:’ and then quoted the law as set down in LEVITICUS of all places!
Now, # 1—if I remember my Old Testament correctly, even Leviticus couldn’t make up its mind on the issue the commenter was tossing out as justification. In one place, it enjoins men not to sleep with their brothers' widows as such acts were deemed adulterous. Then, a few verses later it said they should do so if the widows were of child-bearing age [I guess it’s better to commit adultery than to let any womb go to waste.]
Meanwhile, [ #2] what any of that has to do with sleeping with a prostitute is anybody’s guess.
And, finally, [#3 but the first thing I noticed, actually] was that the Bible-thumper attributed something to "Jesus" that wasn’t a quote of his at all: Hello? Leviticus was written—well, I’m not exactly sure when it was written but, since it was part of the Torah—that’s in the five books of Moses, folks—it was in the Holy Book of the Hebrews some 1,000 to 3,000 years before Joshua bar Joseph was, you know, born. A case of plagiarism by proxy.
Don’tcha just love it when the Bible Thumpers get a goin and the spittle gets a flyin and the folks involved can’t be bothered with the facts? Kinda makes ya proud to be an Uh-mur-kun, huh?
By the way, there were no addenda to this person’s comment so, apparently, no one else noticed that this wasn’t something “Jesus” could have said, anyhow.
I would’ve thought someone might have noticed that little matter. This was an old post and comments to it were closed so I was SOL in bringing that little point to the table, myself.
I was reading a piece in ummmmm—The Huffington Post I think it was, the other day.
In one of the comments someone who wanted people to lighten up on David Vitter said, ‘So says Jesus:’ and then quoted the law as set down in LEVITICUS of all places!
Now, # 1—if I remember my Old Testament correctly, even Leviticus couldn’t make up its mind on the issue the commenter was tossing out as justification. In one place, it enjoins men not to sleep with their brothers' widows as such acts were deemed adulterous. Then, a few verses later it said they should do so if the widows were of child-bearing age [I guess it’s better to commit adultery than to let any womb go to waste.]
Meanwhile, [ #2] what any of that has to do with sleeping with a prostitute is anybody’s guess.
And, finally, [#3 but the first thing I noticed, actually] was that the Bible-thumper attributed something to "Jesus" that wasn’t a quote of his at all: Hello? Leviticus was written—well, I’m not exactly sure when it was written but, since it was part of the Torah—that’s in the five books of Moses, folks—it was in the Holy Book of the Hebrews some 1,000 to 3,000 years before Joshua bar Joseph was, you know, born. A case of plagiarism by proxy.
Don’tcha just love it when the Bible Thumpers get a goin and the spittle gets a flyin and the folks involved can’t be bothered with the facts? Kinda makes ya proud to be an Uh-mur-kun, huh?
By the way, there were no addenda to this person’s comment so, apparently, no one else noticed that this wasn’t something “Jesus” could have said, anyhow.
I would’ve thought someone might have noticed that little matter. This was an old post and comments to it were closed so I was SOL in bringing that little point to the table, myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
